Moderation Issues (3)

Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.

4,124 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (3)”

  1. Correction to my figures. I reported 210 visits for 11th April when in fact it ended up at 438. Anyway here’s the screenshot of the stats.

  2. For those who are wondering what that’s about, it was motivated by this exchange on the “Burden Tennis” thread:

    Alan:

    PS

    Glancing at site statistics, from installing the statistics plugin, towards the end of last year, there was a gently rising trend from around 500 unique daily visits to 600 with a peak of 1400 one day in November. There’s been a gentle decline since then. Yesterday we were down to 210. Just for information.

    “Don’t know what you got till it’s gone!”

    keiths:

    Alan,

    Don’t be shy. Tell us what your hypothesis is, how you evaluated the data, and what your conclusions are.

    You might also want to publish the raw data.

    He’s published the data. Now I hope he’ll address the rest of that comment:

    Don’t be shy. Tell us what your hypothesis is, how you evaluated the data, and what your conclusions are.

  3. Also, this part was incorrect, as Alan acknowledges above:

    Yesterday we were down to 210.

    He prematurely reported the results for April 11th:

    Correction to my figures. I reported 210 visits for 11th April when in fact it ended up at 438.

  4. Alan Fox:
    Correction to my figures. I reported 210 visits for 11th April when in fact it ended up at 438. Anyway here’s the screenshot of the stats.

    That peak around November 13th is interesting. The new posts around that time were:

    The Law of Conservation of Information is Defunct: 227 comments
    Failure to Respond: open thread: 163 comments
    Barry Finally Gets It: 1,072 comments.

    Evidently the UD regulars were leaping to the defense of their glorious leader.

  5. keiths: He prematurely reported the results for April 11th

    Not true, in fact. Since the last update (I think a week or so ago) there seems to be a glitch on the current and previous day total they advance at the same number and only settle down after the next day.

  6. keiths: Don’t be shy. Tell us what your hypothesis is, how you evaluated the data, and what your conclusions are.

    No doubt in my mind that the main factor is Lizzie’s absence.

  7. Alan,

    No doubt in my mind that the main factor is Lizzie’s absence.

    The main factor for what? You haven’t told us what your hypothesis is, how you evaluated the data, and what your conclusions are.

  8. keiths:

    He prematurely reported the results for April 11th:

    Alan:

    Not true, in fact. Since the last update (I think a week or so ago) there seems to be a glitch on the current and previous day total they advance at the same number and only settle down after the next day.

    Alan,

    When you see a large anomaly in the data, the appropriate thing is to investigate before you publish the results. You acted prematurely.

  9. keiths: You acted prematurely.

    Shame Alan. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!

    Say 20 Hail Skepticisms and 20 Our Failures. And be nice to people who act like jerks.

  11. I’m all in favor of real skepticism. You people are just frauds. You can’t even be bothered to start an OP on skepticism and convince anyone what’s good about it or why your version of it ought to be forced down people’s throats.

    #SkepticFail

  12. keiths:
    Mung’s crusade to stamp out skepticism at The Skeptical Zone.

    The people who call themselves “skeptics” are proving to be nothing of the kind-

  13. These people are so convinced they are right that they cannot even see their failure to be “skeptical” of their “skepticism.” Skeptical Irony.

  14. Mung and Frankie, please make a buddy cop movie. I will contribute to your kickstarter.

  16. I wish. You can be the buy my book, wen, by the book straight laced one close to retirement (despite Joe being 82). He’s the make it up as he goes along Maverick.

  17. Rich:

    Mung and Frankie, please make a buddy cop movie.

    Mung:

    Hasn’t that been done already?

    Not of the Lethal Weapon meets Dumb and Dumber variety. You guys would be the first.

  20. Patrick: I’ll toss in $50 if it ends like Thelma and Louise.

    Bite your tongue! There was no end to Thelma and Louise.

  21. Richie is a comedy all to himself. Ever seen him defend anything? No. Ever see him understand anything about science? No

    But hey he is good at cheerleading and providing sound bites.

  23. You’ve taught me so much, Joe. I never knew that the stars were need to stop the earth from falling into the sun until you told us, “For ONE, the earth/ moon system would fall into the Sun without any counter-balance- we need that external pull to help keep us in place.
    Obviously you don’t have much of a physics background. And obviously all you have are “why” questions that 5 year olds ask.”

    I was mistaken, like Newton:

    (edited to add: http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=14;t=6647;st=7500#entry236703 )

  24. Ignorant EvoTard Richie Hughes spews:

    I was mistaken, like Newton:

    Lol! Obvioulsy the stars pull on the cannonball too, cupcake. And your position can’t explain cannonballs.

  25. It’s called expansion, Richie. But hey you think it’s science to imagine a universe with only one star, one planet with one moon.

    So tell us, Richie- in such a system what would prevent its collapse? Show your work

  27. Frankie,

    You’ve tried “expansion” before. As Oleg points out here: http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=14;t=6647;st=7500#entry236682

    “Hubble’s empirical law tells us that two points separated by 1 megaparsec move away from each other at a speed of 68 km/s. Earth is 5 microparsecs away from Sun. The expansion of space between them occurs at a speed of 0.3 micron per second. Utterly inconsequential.”

    And remember, you originally said:

    “For ONE, the earth/ moon system would fall into the Sun without any counter-balance- we need that external pull to help keep us in place.
    Obviously you don’t have much of a physics background. And obviously all you have are ‘why’ questions that 5 year olds ask.”

    Whoops.

  28. Richie the clueless strikes again. Oleg was using the entire EXISTING universe, meaning his pap did NOT apply to your scenario of a universe with only the earth, moon and sun. It’s as if you are totally clueless.

    And everything was explained, Richie. It is OK that people forget about things like expansion when dealing with your Gish gallop.

    But thanks for avoiding my question. That says it all

  29. But hey you think it’s science to imagine a universe with only one star, one planet with one moon.

    So tell us, Richie- in such a system what would prevent its collapse? Show your work

    Or just admit that I was right and move on

  30. If expansion has negligible effect that it has negligible effect Joe. You referred to “without any counter-balance- we need that external pull to help keep us in place.”, Newton’s cannonball needs no “external pull” to stay in place, how does it achieve this? Why do yo think planets and moons cannot do this?

    Expansion is not required, a Newton’s cannonball would remain in orbit in a static universe.

    Happy to have taught you basic Physics.

  31. Frankie:
    But hey you think it’s science to imagine a universe with only one star, one planet with one moon.


    So tell us, Richie- in such a system what would prevent its collapse? Show your work

    Or just admit that I was right and move on

    Trivial – many stable orbital models exist without expansion as a variable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_modeling

  32. LoL! How do you know that expansion will have a negligible effect in your BS universe? Show your work.

    and while you are at it:

    But hey you think it’s science to imagine a universe with only one star, one planet with one moon.

    So tell us, Richie- in such a system what would prevent its collapse? Show your work

  34. Richie’s link to orbital modelling is pure desperation and does not address the model we are discussing. Tell us Richie how, in your scenario, the orbits were reached in the first place?

  35. Joe,

    1. Do you think expansion is need in the Universe to stop the Earth falling into the Sun?
    2. If not, then why would it be needed in a simulated universe.

    Thanks.

  37. Frankie: Tell us Richie how, in your scenario, the orbits were reached in the first place?

    Intelligent Designer put them there, Obviously.

  39. Frankie:
    Without expansion the universe would collapse- that includes our system.

    How would you describe something this is neither expanding nor contracting?

  40. Mung,

    Sorry. It’s just hilarious to reel him in after he questions my understanding of science. I could have picked pyramid power, or H2O2, or many other things.

  41. It depends on the context, Richie. In the context of your BS universe I would call it more BS.

    But I love how Richie gets his question answered and then moves the goalposts

  44. And of course I question Richie’s understanding of science- he is an evolutionist who position makes untestable claims. Yet he thinks it is science.

    ID has a testable methodology and Richie sez it isn’t science, Evolutionism is BS and he thinks it is science. Obviously he doesn’t understand science

  45. LoL! The Richie gallop hits full stride- now I am all of the legal scholars who say Cruz is ineligible to be President.

    Pathetic, even for you, cupcake

  48. Frankie,

    My “soundbite” was longer than your reply to it, Joe. For Christmas, we’re going to have to get you some self-awareness.

  49. This thread is for the discussion of moderation issues. Perhaps we need to rename it to make that more clear, but it is what it is.

    Noyau is thataway —–>.

  50. Patrick,

    Sorry. He’s just so easy to wind up. Come over to Noyau, Joe. I have questions about pyramid power.

Comments are closed.